IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2609.27293.html

Singleton-Attainability and Transparent Access in Matching

Author

Listed:
  • Szilvia P'apai

Abstract

Matching mechanisms differ in how much of an agent's preference ranking must be determined and reported to obtain a particular object. A mechanism is singleton-attainable (SA) if every object that an agent can obtain through some report can also be obtained by reporting only that object as acceptable. With an SA mechanism, once an attainable object has been identified, the agent need not rank or report any other object. Singleton-attainability identifies a distinct dimension in matching theory and market design: transparent access to attainable outcomes, separate from incentives, stability, welfare or equity. We establish general conditions for SA and derive its strategic implications. Top-lift invariance and truncation invariance together imply SA, while strategyproofness and stability each imply SA. By contrast, no Pareto improvement over a strategyproof, individually rational, and non-wasteful mechanism is SA. In particular, every Pareto improvement over Deferred Acceptance violates SA. We introduce report width, which measures how many acceptable objects may have to be reported to obtain an object. SA mechanisms have report width one. Report width is unbounded for a large class of efficient mechanisms that Pareto-improve Deferred Acceptance. Stable selection with report-induced priorities has width one when priorities are monotone and maximal width under reverse priority dominance. Rank-welfare maximization has width one when the outside-option rank is fixed and maximal width when it is report-dependent. These results reveal a structural divide, which we call the width dichotomy: across all mechanisms and families in our classification and all structural classes we study, report width is either one or unbounded.

Suggested Citation

  • Szilvia P'apai, 2026. "Singleton-Attainability and Transparent Access in Matching," Papers 2609.27293, arXiv.org.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2609.27293
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2609.27293
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Julien Grenet & YingHua He & Dorothea Kübler, 2022. "Preference Discovery in University Admissions: The Case for Dynamic Multioffer Mechanisms," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 130(6), pages 1427-1476.
    2. Muntasir Chaudhury & Szilvia Papai, 2024. "Affirmative Action Policies in School Choice: Immediate versus Deferred Acceptance," Working Papers 24001, Concordia University, Department of Economics.
    3. Julien Grenet & Yinghua He & Dorothea Kübler, 2022. "Preference Discovery in University Admissions: The Case for Dynamic Multioffer Mechanisms," PSE-Ecole d'économie de Paris (Postprint) hal-04157650, HAL.
    4. Estelle Cantillon, 2017. "Broadening the market design approach to school choice," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 33(4), pages 613-634.
    5. Rustamdjan Hakimov & Onur Kesten, 2018. "The Equitable Top Trading Cycles Mechanism For School Choice," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 59(4), pages 2219-2258, November.
    6. Bonkoungou, Somouaoga & Nesterov, Alexander, 2021. "Comparing school choice and college admissions mechanisms by their strategic accessibility," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 16(3), July.
    7. Somouaoga Bonkoungou & Alexander Nesterov, 2025. "When do reforms meet fairness concerns in school admissions?," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 65(2), pages 449-473, September.
    8. Ozgun Ekici & Sinan Ertemel & M. Bumin Yenmez, 2026. "Rawlsian equity: a new notion of fairness for the assignment problem," Papers 2607.29080, arXiv.org.
    9. Justine S. Hastings & Jeffrey M. Weinstein, 2008. "Information, School Choice, and Academic Achievement: Evidence from Two Experiments," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 123(4), pages 1373-1414.
    10. Tomás Larroucau & Ignacio A. Rios & Anaïs Fabre & Christopher Neilson, 2025. "College Application Mistakes and the Design of Information Policies at Scale," NBER Working Papers 34164, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Lars Ehlers & Bettina Klaus, 2014. "Strategy-Proofness Makes the Difference: Deferred-Acceptance with Responsive Priorities," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 39(4), pages 949-966, November.
    12. Parag A. Pathak, 2011. "The Mechanism Design Approach to Student Assignment," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 3(1), pages 513-536, September.
    13. Atila Abdulkadiroglu & Parag A. Pathak & Alvin E. Roth, 2009. "Strategy-Proofness versus Efficiency in Matching with Indifferences: Redesigning the NYC High School Match," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(5), pages 1954-1978, December.
    14. Alvin Roth, 2008. "Deferred acceptance algorithms: history, theory, practice, and open questions," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 36(3), pages 537-569, March.
    15. Rustamdjan Hakimov & Madhav Raghavan, 2026. "Improving Transparency and Verifiability in School Admissions: Theory and Experiment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 72(4), pages 2867-2894, April.
    16. Parag A. Pathak & Tayfun Sönmez, 2013. "School Admissions Reform in Chicago and England: Comparing Mechanisms by Their Vulnerability to Manipulation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(1), pages 80-106, February.
    17. Aram Grigoryan & Markus Möller, 2025. "A Theory of Auditability for Allocation Mechanisms," CRC TR 224 Discussion Paper Series crctr224_2025_652, University of Bonn and University of Mannheim, Germany.
    18. Ehlers, Lars & Klaus, Bettina, 2016. "Object allocation via deferred-acceptance: Strategy-proofness and comparative statics," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 128-146.
    19. Thayer Morrill, 2015. "Two simple variations of top trading cycles," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 60(1), pages 123-140, September.
    20. Josue Ortega & Geng Zhao & Gabriel Ziegler, 2026. "Efficiency Adjustments Break the Logarithmic Rank Barrier," Papers 2608.09984, arXiv.org.
    21. Ayoade, Nickesha & Pápai, Szilvia, 2023. "School choice with preference rank classes," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 317-341.
    22. Atila Abdulkadiroglu & Parag A. Pathak & Alvin E. Roth, 2009. "Strategy-proofness versus Efficiency in Matching with Indifferences: Redesigning the New York City High School Match," NBER Working Papers 14864, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    23. Julien Grenet & Yinghua He & Dorothea Kübler, 2022. "Preference Discovery in University Admissions: The Case for Dynamic Multioffer Mechanisms," Post-Print hal-04157650, HAL.
    24. Tom‡s Larroucau & Ignacio A. Rios & Ana•s Fabre & Christopher Neilson, 2025. "College Application Mistakes and the Design of Information Policies at Scale," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 2461, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    25. Zhang, Jun, 2023. "Strategy-proof allocation with outside option," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 50-67.
    26. Nikhil Agarwal & Paulo Somaini, 2018. "Demand Analysis Using Strategic Reports: An Application to a School Choice Mechanism," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 86(2), pages 391-444, March.
    27. Yan Chen & Onur Kesten, 2017. "Chinese College Admissions and School Choice Reforms: A Theoretical Analysis," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 125(1), pages 99-139.
    28. Umut Dur & Parag A. Pathak & Fei Song & Tayfun Sönmez, 2022. "Deduction Dilemmas: The Taiwan Assignment Mechanism," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 14(1), pages 164-185, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Szilvia Pápai, 2026. "Singleton-Attainability and Transparent Access in Matching," Working Papers 26001, Concordia University, Department of Economics.
    2. Estelle Cantillon & Li Chen & Juan Sebastian Pereyra Barreiro, 2022. "Respecting priorities versus respecting preferences in school choice: When is there a trade-off ?," Working Papers ECARES 2022-39, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    3. Atila Abdulkadiroglu & Tommy Andersson, 2022. "School Choice," NBER Working Papers 29822, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Ayoade, Nickesha & Pápai, Szilvia, 2023. "School choice with preference rank classes," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 317-341.
    5. Cantillon, Estelle & Chen, Li & Pereyra, Juan S., 2024. "Respecting priorities versus respecting preferences in school choice: When is there a trade-off?," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 82-96.
    6. Olivier de Groote & Anaïs Fabre & Margaux Luflade & Arnaud Maurel, 2025. "Sequential College Admission Mechanisms and Off-Platform Options," Working Papers hal-05212878, HAL.
    7. Atı̇la Abdulkadı̇roğlu & Joshua D. Angrist & Yusuke Narita & Parag Pathak, 2022. "Breaking Ties: Regression Discontinuity Design Meets Market Design," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 90(1), pages 117-151, January.
    8. Tong Wang & Congyi Zhou, 2020. "High school admission reform in China: a welfare analysis," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 24(3), pages 215-269, December.
    9. Cheng, Yao & Wang, Dazhong & Yu, Jingsheng, 2026. "On the existence of a strong Nash equilibrium under the efficiency-adjusted deferred acceptance mechanism," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 505-526.
    10. Mustafa Oğuz Afacan & Umut Dur, 2023. "Strategy‐proof size improvement: is it possible?," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 125(2), pages 321-338, April.
    11. Yu-Ting Ho, 2025. "Matching Under Preference Uncertainty: Random Allocation, Informativeness, and Welfare," Papers 2511.09988, arXiv.org.
    12. Ha, Wei & Kang, Le & Song, Yang, 2020. "College matching mechanisms and matching stability: Evidence from a natural experiment in China," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 175(C), pages 206-226.
    13. Decerf, Benoit & Van der Linden, Martin, 2021. "Manipulability in school choice," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 197(C).
    14. Tong Wang & Congyi Zhou, 2024. "Purchasing seats in school choice and inequality," Quantitative Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 15(4), pages 1151-1195, November.
    15. Caterina Calsamiglia & Chao Fu & Maia Güell, 2014. "Structural Estimation of a Model of School Choices: the Boston Mechanism vs. Its Alternatives," Working Papers 2014-21, FEDEA.
    16. Camilo J. Sirguiado & Jiarui Xie, 2026. "Credibility in school choice," Papers 2608.29597, arXiv.org.
    17. Rustamdjan Hakimov & Madhav Raghavan, 2026. "Improving Transparency and Verifiability in School Admissions: Theory and Experiment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 72(4), pages 2867-2894, April.
    18. Tommy Andersson & Umut Dur & Sinan Ertemel & Onur Kesten, 2024. "Sequential school choice with public and private schools," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 63(2), pages 231-276, September.
    19. repec:hhs:lunewp:2023_012 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Basteck, Christian & Klaus, Bettina & Kübler, Dorothea, 2021. "How lotteries in school choice help to level the playing field," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 198-237.
    21. Pamela Giustinelli & Charles F. Manski, 2018. "Survey Measures Of Family Decision Processes For Econometric Analysis Of Schooling Decisions," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 56(1), pages 81-99, January.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2609.27293. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://arxiv.org/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.